On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 03:21:48PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 24/07/2013 15:15, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 09:43:06PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 23/07/2013 19:41, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:23:08PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wr
Il 24/07/2013 15:15, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 09:43:06PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 23/07/2013 19:41, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:23:08PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 23/07/2013 17:40, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> On Tue
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 09:43:06PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 23/07/2013 19:41, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:23:08PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 23/07/2013 17:40, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wr
Il 23/07/2013 19:41, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:23:08PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 23/07/2013 17:40, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 23/07/2013 16:13, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> On Tue
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:23:08PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 23/07/2013 17:40, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 23/07/2013 16:13, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:18:03AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wr
Il 23/07/2013 17:40, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 23/07/2013 16:13, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:18:03AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 22/07/2013 21:25, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> Bug de
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 23/07/2013 16:13, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:18:03AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 22/07/2013 21:25, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> >>> Bug description: QEMU currently gets all bits from GET_SUP
Il 23/07/2013 16:13, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:18:03AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 22/07/2013 21:25, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
>>> Bug description: QEMU currently gets all bits from GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
>>> for CPUID leaf 0xA and passes them directly to the gue
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 08:01:29AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 16:25:35 -0300
> Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>
> > Bug description: QEMU currently gets all bits from GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
> > for CPUID leaf 0xA and passes them directly to the guest. This makes
> > the guest ABI depe
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:18:03AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 22/07/2013 21:25, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> > Bug description: QEMU currently gets all bits from GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
> > for CPUID leaf 0xA and passes them directly to the guest. This makes
> > the guest ABI depend on host kern
Il 22/07/2013 21:25, Eduardo Habkost ha scritto:
> Bug description: QEMU currently gets all bits from GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
> for CPUID leaf 0xA and passes them directly to the guest. This makes
> the guest ABI depend on host kernel and host CPU capabilities, and
> breaks live migration if we migrate
On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 16:25:35 -0300
Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> Bug description: QEMU currently gets all bits from GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
> for CPUID leaf 0xA and passes them directly to the guest. This makes
> the guest ABI depend on host kernel and host CPU capabilities, and
> breaks live migration if
Bug description: QEMU currently gets all bits from GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
for CPUID leaf 0xA and passes them directly to the guest. This makes
the guest ABI depend on host kernel and host CPU capabilities, and
breaks live migration if we migrate between host with different
capabilities (e.g. different
13 matches
Mail list logo